/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>52347536
>modern economy is based on information
>the richest corporations in the world have little land area and earn trillions of dollars from selling software and digital products
>land is a tiny fraction of capital value beneath technology, vehicles, industrial machinery, etc
>less than 2% of the population works in agriculture, agricultural output of land a tiny fraction of the economy

>hurrdurr let's make land the only thing that determines tax value!

Anyone taking this idea remotely seriously is a reddit tier moron completely out of touch with reality mentally masturbating to midwit tier 18th century concepts that have no bearing whatsoever on actual reality

>>52347623
I definitely disagree with the proponents that think an LVT can replace *all* taxes in society. Without detracting from my original question, my particular interest was in the advantage of LVT vs. traditional hybrid property/land taxes. An LVT seems more transparent, is easier to calculate, less prone to corruption, and doesn't require the overhead of a department of tax assessors and an incredibly complex tax code for all the minutiae and categories of property type/size/quality/purpose.

>>52347536
I would like a 5% tax on all corporations who buy single family homes.

>>52347536
Georgism is cringe. Marxism is based.

>>52347752
LVTs make sense but fail in implementation because the landowning class always votes away LVTs.

>>52347536
>Anyone here a land value tax supporter?
No, Rothbard already refuted this bullshit.
There's a big thread on the austrian econ discord server with austrians and georgists going back and forth for months and in the end the austrians won.

The reason land/housing is in a massive bubble is central bank money printing, always was, always will be.
Just end the fed and housing will be affordable again.

>>52348378
Why? They are only about 0.01% of all single family home ownership in the entire country.
Don't tell me you actually believe leftist conspiracies about blackrock. I'm not even defending blackrock here, I just think you're mistaken on this one thing.

>>52349080
>Marxism is based.
Kek you're a drooling retard who hasn't read Bohm Bawerk.

>>52349301
30% of single family homes were bought by investors in 2021

>>52347623
Why should digital products be taxed anything if they are instantly relocatable? Just tax the land the server rack sits on.

>>52347536
I support it, for religious reasons and also because it will piss everyone off.

>>52347536
>For example, let's assume the current system is the standard land/property hybrid tax regime. Someone owns an area of greenery/forest around their home, that doesn't have much value because the home itself is the only development. Under an LVT, their taxes would jump up considerably,
They wouldn't have to pay taxes on products or pay an income tax though. It balances out.

>>52349275
>Everything bad is the Fed's fault
I love this board

>>52349517
but but mur speculation is losing money

I want the opposite of the SALT deduction. The higher the state and local taxes are, the more you have to pay the feds too.

>>52347536
what a dumb fuck, if you want empty lots to disappear remove all zoning restrictions and housing codes. houses and land will turn into used car tier assets and the economy would finally grow as it's supposed to

>>52349517
Hilarious, things keep inflating in value and the one entity that does it gets a free pass because retard sheep like this anon.

it is interesting how Henry George is all but forgotten given how popular he once was

>>52347536
I want a 100% tax on communists.

>>52349755
I just want to give them helicopter rides.

>>52349503
>wouldn't have to
That's presupposing that product and income taxes would be removed to make way for the LVT. Nothing about the LVT itself inherently requires that to take place, and many people have put forward that modern governments wouldn't be able to support themselves off of LVT alone.
I'm not defending that conclusion; just stating that LVT in and of itself is merely a replacement for the hybrid tax, and that any discussion of repealing other taxes is a separate conversation. I recognize that many LVT proponents believe that other taxes will be made redundant if it went into effect, but that's still a implementation-dependent and not a property of the LVT theory.

Holy shit a Henry George thread
TOASTING

>>52347623
LVT is a tax on UNIMPROVED value of land, in other words it's a tax on rent-seekers
Given the size of the real estate market, this would easily net enough revenue to at least replace property tax and inheritance tax, which are the two most egregious forms of extortion
>reddit tier moron
>makes 1 post and leaves because he knows his low IQ post would get BTFO
kill yourself

>>52349112
Yup, it's the reason why the British House of Lords was stripped of it's veto power. They voted against a LVT bill. That's (((democracy))) for you.

>>52349275
>Just end the fed
Why not both? End the central bank money system AND the land monopoly.

>>52347536
as i understand it, the wilderness areas could simply be treated as a form of development i.e. designated ecological protection zones, earning carbon credits or eco-credits. seems like that will be a big thing in the coming SDG 2030 UN plan world

>>52347623
you're thinking too narrowly because you are too entrenched in the current system, instead of thinking about what could be you are thinking about what is. other methods of economic organization are possible.

>>52349275
That's only true in America, and only in certain parts. In most places, house prices are inflated because of immigration.

Did I screw up somewhere? Getting 1,656,031,764 acres in the USA not owned by the Feds here:
>https://ballotpedia.org/Federal_land_ownership_by_state
and $5.4 trillion in total tax revenues here:
>https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-breakdown-revenues-among-federal-state-and-local-governments
I make it $3,260/year per private acre to make up the same revenue. That's only $540/year for my comfy suburban 1/6 acre, or ~1/46 of my current tax burden.

This suggests Georgism isn't as extreme as it seems at first, but also that it wouldn't really address urban sprawl or landlordism. I still think there would need to be a different system for agriculture, even if it's just subsidies (which we have now anyway).

>>52351688
https://www.hgsss.org/lvt-calculator/
OK I'm a retard. The LVT would be established on recent land transactions, just like current property taxes, only on the land alone. Even so, if I was taxed at ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of the land value per year, my overall tax burden would be significantly lower than it currently is. So I think the point about sprawl and landlordism holds.

>>52351207
Every country has its own version of the Fed, anon.

>>52349643
Anon can you explain more on this point?

>>52351839
The sprawl is addressed by the fact that, presently, there is a disincentive for dense housing development in that building those units causes the tax value of the land+property combo to go way up. Whether you rent those units out successfully or not, you're on the hook for the value of your housing complex.
But if you're only taxed on the value of the land, you can build as much of a development as you want (and even make it nicer, since quality of structure impacts property taxes) and your tax burden stays the same. With less disincentive to capitalize land in the city centers, people would be less inclined to buy cheaper land in the city margins and start their businesses / make housing out there.
The landlordism part is a bit over my head based off my superficial understanding as yet. For sure they expect quality of housing to go up, and probably availability/supply as well. I've seen people saying things along the lines of "if the land is taxed sufficiently close to the LVT optimum, the price of the land itself decreases toward 0, since the new purchaser is taking up a big tax burden. Thus, people are more inclined to buy/sell, and less likely to just hold onto the land indefinitely in the hopes that another land bubble arises to sell within". I'm not sure if those points are accurate or realistic, but that's the impression I'm getting.

One thing I'm not quite understanding yet is how confidently one can evaluate the value of land separately from the land+developments combo. Those seem difficult to disentangle, although I realize both that LVT has been put into effect in some form or other at various times/places, as well as that normal hybrid property assessment likely distinguishes the two already (I'm not familiar with this). It seems tricky to me to do accurately though, and as cleanly as proponents suggest.

>>52350349
Land isn't a monopoly

>>52349517
Retard

>>52349717
What a retarded fucking image holy shit
Its defending FDR and the new deal too
Kill yourself

Why do you think things cost so much more now, brainlet?
Its the central bank policies YOU support.

>>52351688
Urban sprawl and landlords are extremely based though.
Nobody wants to live in your cramped inefficient commieblocks.

>>52347536
Sounds like Jewish subversion unless you fix the entire tax system to be a flat tax based on revenue at EOY.

>>52349396
Source?
You literally just made that up.

>>52347536
>Anyone here a land value tax supporter?
fuck yes

>>52352593
>t. retard

>>52347752
LVT is the only tax that makes sense to me. It’s also one of the only taxes that will remain enforceable in the future because it has a physical target. Many other taxes should and will eventually become unenforceable. Income tax for example will fall to zero as technology advances. CBDC’s, atleast in the form that the WEF dreams of, will fail. The reinstitution of commodity backed (gold/silver/other) currencies and the destruction of private central banks practicing usury would make it significantly cheaper to sustain governments using minimal taxation.

So if we had a deflationary currency, no zoning laws, no building codes, and only a LVT, how much better off would the average man be? Someone explain this to me please.

>>52352736
>rivate central banks practicing usury
Usury is good though and people who are against it need to be killed.

>NOOO YOU CAN'T JUST CHARGE INTEREST ON LOANS, YOU HAVE TO LEND ME YOUR MONEY FOR FREE AND TAKE ON ALL OF THE RISK AND OPPORTUNITY COST

>>52352777
>So if we had a deflationary currency, no zoning laws, no building codes, and only a LVT, how much better off would the average man be? Someone explain this to me please.
A million times better. We probably wouldn't have to work, or we would work like 1-2 days a week tops.
LVT is fucking stupid though, the other things you mentioned are based.
Just become an ancap or a minarchist Libertarian.

>>52352811
Checked.
Wouldn't a minarchist set up still need taxes?

>>52352835
You can have voluntary taxes if the burden of government funding is that small. There would be free riders sure, but it wouldn't be an issue.
You would also need to ban left wing political parties and make it so the constitution is extremely free market and cannot be changed etc.

>>52352835
You should read Mises, Rothbard and Hoppe, friend.

>>52347536
>Let's just transfer MORE money to the Big Daddy Government, the welfare leeches still constitute for less than 50% of the population and we need to fix that!
Fuck off, retard. Taxes are the food source for like 90% of the problems we have with governments.

>>52352875
Will do although I am skeptical. The idea that a low trust society with a bunch of different ethnic groups and religions could live under anything but an authoritarian state seems a bit utopian.

>>52352785
Being against usury does not mean you are against loans. You can charge interest, just not at unreasonable rates. When you are printing money out of thin air and charging interest on it, that loan is physically impossible to pay back. Printing fiat and loans that are impossible to fully pay back and creating inflation in the process is what I would consider usurious.

>>52352936
>The idea that a low trust society with a bunch of different ethnic groups and religions could live under anything but an authoritarian state seems a bit utopian.
A minarchist state can still have a strong police force.
I'm not fully on board with ancaps but if you read into it, they have a bunch of different mechanisms for dealing with violence and security like private legal systems etc.

>>52352958
>Being against usury does not mean you are against loans.
I mean, it literally does. Usury means charging interest on loans.

>just not at unreasonable rates.
Who defines that? It sounds ridiculous. The market should decide interest rates, not some central planner central banker. Interest rates are high if there isn't enough savings in the economy. As savings increases, interest rates decrease. It's a naturally correcting mechanism. When the government fucks with the interest rate, it causes economic disaster.

>When you are printing money out of thin air and charging interest on it, that loan is physically impossible to pay back.
Yes I am aware. But that's not usury, that's central banking.
Central banks usually charge low interest rates.

>Printing fiat and loans that are impossible to fully pay back and creating inflation in the process is what I would consider usurious.
I think you're just using the wrong word, bro.

Income taxes are shit (easily evadable)
The land should be taxed
Estonia already has it
Ancaps are gay
Geofacism now

>>52353104
Estonia is one of the most free market countries on earth.
They're the opposite of what you support. You're literally a communist.

>>52352516
Yes it is, the board game Monopoly was literally based on Henry George's philosophy

>>52347623
well I agreed with it until I read this comment

fuck. I hate that any political opinion I hold can be dissected in a paragraph by an anon. This is why I vote kanye and go home

>>52352736
God I hope this would be true
>physical target
I think LVT, VAT, corporate tax, and Pigovian taxes are the only ones that make sense and are fair. And none of them are affecting the average working or middle class family.

>CBDC’s, atleast in the form that the WEF dreams of, will fail.
what makes you so optimistic? all the government needs to do is literally airdrop money into digital wallets and all the NPC retards will rush to download their cattle apps again, like they did with vax passes.

>>52352910
nice reading comprehension retard

>>52353231
>VAT
Too much accounting overhead and is prone to abuse.

>>52353231
>And none of them are affecting the average working or middle class family.
VAT is absolutely doing that.

>>52353396
>>52353288
VAT is essentially a luxury tax and is only a 'regressive tax' for the low IQ consumerist
buying nintendo switch, fast food, candy etc. has VAT charge
buying groceries and cleaning appliances etc. does not
it's a pretty good and fair system

>>52353564
all taxation is theft
simple as

>>52353141
Whatever lib-tard (libertarian-retard)

>>52353030
I guess you are right I am using the wrong word and I should just say central banking. I didn’t mean to say I was against all loans. You need to have interest on loans given the time value of money.

>>52353707
Cope
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_economic_freedom

>>52353723
>I guess you are right I am using the wrong word and I should just say central banking.
It's alright friend. You're on the right path.

>>52353231
>what makes you so optimistic? all the government needs to do is literally airdrop money into digital wallets and all the NPC retards will rush to download their cattle apps again, like they did with vax passes.
IMO it didn’t really seem like the vax passes took off the way they were intended. Maybe they will try to push it gradually but I just don’t see enough people tolerating lockdowns and all that shit again. The other reason is just that we know these digital currencies are going to be restrictive and punitive. There’s going to be unparalleled financial surveillance, expiration dates on digital money, ESG credits etc. I think when you try to push all that, even when you have WEF coordinating it across multiple nations, you are inevitably going to see new markets pop up to fill those gaps. To me, it seems like more and more people are waking up faster than the new slave system can be fully implemented. Even if I am wrong, I really don’t see the point in getting blackpilled. Humanity is at a crossroads and whatever we decide, it’s an interesting time to be alive.

>>52354662
thanks for the perspective

>>52353723
stop aviposting

>>52347623
lvt principles can apply to intellectual property. similar to how wireless spectrum is a public good leased to carriers. but you underestimate the impact of land values on urban life.

>>52355322

>>52352865
>free markets
>but you cant do x

>>52353030
>that is not usury
that is literally usury

>>52349517
well
it is

>>52356030
We were basically arriving at the same conclusion so I didn’t want to get too autistic about the details. Central banks printing money and usury go hand in hand. You can have regular loans charging interest without usury. I see what he is saying about determining what is “reasonable” by law, but it’s probably easier to figure that out when you don’t have the CB’s involved.
>>52356056
Based

>>52357517
it literally says there bruh, charging interest is usury.

>>52347623
https://gameofrent.com/content/is-land-a-big-deal#is-land-a-really-big-deal